Decentralisation – the end…?

i presume so. it was implemented stupidly anyway. just looking to fill the city’s of the respective ministers. idea was sound enough though

Originally posted by d_d_dallas
So Charlie’s being conveniently packed off to Brussels… Does anyone think the demise of decentralisation will coincide with this?

Yes and it is also quite possible that the now well again Liz O’Donnell will replace Tom Parlon, Liz was possibly the best overseas aid minister for state ever. Decentralisation of resources vs favours possibly?

I think McCreevy was a good choice like MCSharry before him

I’m not a big fan of the major parties espically Fianna Fail, although they seem to be the only ones that make anything happen.
However I am/was a fan of Mc Greevys, I though him a good finance minister, was not too quick to go out borrowing which is very tempting for any finance minister, kept the purse strings tight, respected that.
Also believe he gave all he could to the health service etc but this money has been mismanaged, that is where the problems are, the NRA etc.

very true.

oh! by the way i thought u were in cardiff, not castlebar.

Originally posted by FIN
very true.

oh! by the way i thought u were in cardiff, not castlebar.

Both centres renowned for extra curricular activities with sheep, so does it matter? 😀

lol…

It is ironic that the author of decentralisation has been de-centralised.

Or centralised, depending on the way you look at it!

Originally published by An Taisce
An Taisce Statement on Decentralisation

http://www.antaisce.org/press/index.html?id=860
Decentralisation is the opportunity for the Government to showcase sustainable building techniques commended in their own policy documents, said a spokesman from An Taisce.

An Taisce recently issued a statement addressed to the Decentralisation Implementation Committee and Office of Public Works asking that all new developments undertaken by the Government to locate public servants outside of Dublin be built in accordance with best practice in line with the Commission of the European Communities communication ‘Towards a thematic strategy on the urban environment.’ Responding to the Report of the Decentralisation Implementation Group published on the 7th of April, the document stresses the importance of ensuring that sustainability criteria are considered in all decisions regarding accommodation.

The statement expresses concern that the decentralisation programme as announced fails to support strategic national spatial planning and may have negative implications in relation to the investment in infrastructure and services in Gateways and Hubs, as suggested by the submission by the presidents of the engineering, planning and architectural professional bodies. However, An Taisce confirms their support for the Government’s commitment to decentralisation subject to assurances that, in terms of location, the reuse of older buildings, the construction of new buildings and the provision of attendant housing and social infrastructure, the most socially, economically and environmentally sustainable options are chosen.

The statement quotes from the Governments own ‘Guidelines on Architectural Heritage Protection’ on the importance of encapsulating the value of retaining old buildings as, for example in Ballihadreen where a government unit has already been relocated into an old convent, and refers to many underused institutional buildings in some of the towns nominated for decentralisation.

Where no appropriate building already exists sites should be located close to town centres taking into account the need to minimise the growth in traffic, a key imperative in all recent government policies.

Most importantly new buildings associated with the decentralisation programme offer the opportunity to show-case sustainable construction and energy conservation as proposed in the Sustainable Development Strategy 1997 which states that new development should minimise artificial lighting, heating and mechanical ventilation, should avoid air conditioning, conserve water, use the site and material wisely and recycle where possible. Building Regulations are currently being updated to meet European standards to encompass new insulation and energy ratings and Government research into new procurement methods can be tested and developed.

Once buildings have been constructed or converted there are further procedures that are needed to reach agreed standards of sustainable development such as mobility strategies. The statement also refers to associated housing provision and social services as part of sustainable development, in particular the need to encourage staff to live in the towns where they may contribute to the existing community and possibly make improvements to the social infrastructure more viable.

I suppose they could decentralise the 20% who want to go, to locations highlighted by the NSS in the type of buildings described above, or contemporary buildings only of a high architectural quality . I believe FF/PD lost 25% of their Councillors in the recipient constituencies during the local election.

Decentralisation plans hit legal snag

25/07/04 00:00

By Niamh Connolly
The government has been warned that staff in 30 state agencies could pursue constructive dismissal cases if it proceeds with its plan to decentralise jobs out of Dublin.

In a further blow to the government’s controversial policy, officials at the Department of Finance have been warned by the union, Siptu, that any attempt to transfer state agencies to the regions could lead to “a situation of dismissal” under the terms of the Redundancy Payments Act 1997.

Siptu, which represents 20 state agencies, briefed finance officials on legal advice it had received about decentralisation at a meeting last month, according to Owen Reidy, the union’s branch secretary for state and related agencies.

“We have brought it to the attention of the department of finance that if the plan were to go ahead as envisaged, it has the potential to lead to a dismissal or compulsory redundancy situation,” he said.

Only 2 per cent of state agency employees, out of 2,249 surveyed, expressed any interest in moving out of Dublin, according to figures compiled by the Central Application Facility (Caf).

According to Reidy, 95 per cent of Siptu’s membership were not interested in relocating with their agency.

If an employer moves a workplace to an alternative location that exceeds a certain reasonable distance, there is the potential for a redundancy situation to arise, Reidy said.

The figures show no staff want to move to Athlone, where the Higher Education Authority is to be relocated under the decentralisation plan.

Staff also do not want to move to Mallow, Co Cork, where Failte Ireland is to be relocated, Clonakilty, Co Cork (Bord Iascaigh Mhara), Carrickmacross (Comhairle, the advisory agency), Monaghan (Combat Poverty Agency), Shannon (Irish Aviation Authority) and Thomastown, Co Kilkenny (Health and Safety Authority).

Just seven of the 292 staff in Enterprise Ireland want to move to Shannon, while just five of the 382 staff in Fas want to move to Birr.

The terms and conditions of employment for people working in state agencies differ from those of civil servants.

There is an established practice of civil servants transferring between departments to gain experience and this was facilitated by the clerical and administrative nature of their work.

However, no similar mechanism exists for state agency staff with specialised skills to transfer between agencies.

This presents the government with a potential legal problem if it proceeds with its decentralisation plans.

“National Roads Authority engineers have specific skills and do not have the option of becoming tax inspectors,” said Reidy. Similarly, specialised staff in the Ordinance Survey of Ireland are not likely to transfer to the Combat Poverty Agency.

“Where are they going to get employment for their skills with the same conditions and terms of employment, unless they move with their workplace?” said Reidy.

Siptu urged a boycott of this survey on the grounds that it was not voluntary, as it did not offer state sector employees the option of remaining in Dublin.

It has also written to state agency employers advising them of a pre-emptive ballot on the potential of pre-emptive strike action, “should the situation worsen”, according to the union.

The Caf figures show that only 7.5 per cent of civil service staff are interested in moving out of Dublin. This amounts to 471 out of a total 6,277 civil servants.

Despite the paucity of interest among civil servants and state agency staff, the Minister of State at the Department of Finance, Tom Parlon, is proceeding with the purchase of sites in Athlone, the Curragh, Longford, Furbo, Carlow and Trim for relocated state agencies and departments.

Originally posted by Paul Clerkin
Decentralisation plans hit legal snag

25/07/04 00:00

By Niamh Connolly
The government has been warned that staff in 30 state agencies could pursue constructive dismissal cases if it proceeds with its plan to decentralise jobs out of Dublin.

In a further blow to the government’s controversial policy, officials at the Department of Finance have been warned by the union, Siptu, that any attempt to transfer state agencies to the regions could lead to “a situation of dismissal” under the terms of the Redundancy Payments Act 1997.

Only 2 per cent of state agency employees, out of 2,249 surveyed, expressed any interest in moving out of Dublin, according to figures compiled by the Central Application Facility (Caf).

“National Roads Authority engineers have specific skills and do not have the option of becoming tax inspectors,” said Reidy.

It might not do any harm if the NRA gained some experience of just how limited state funds are before shovelling so much cash in to multiple motorways ie 4 in Co Meath and a 70+ mile link from Portlaoise to Limerick when two in Meath and a 25 mile link was possible for Limerick.

Originally Posted By Paul Clerkin
Despite the paucity of interest among civil servants and state agency staff, the Minister of State at the Department of Finance, Tom Parlon, is proceeding with the purchase of sites in Athlone, the Curragh, Longford, Furbo, Carlow and Trim for relocated state agencies and departments. [/B]

I will be surprised to see Parlon at Junior ministerial level come Christmas, the Midlands expansion strategy of the PDs is in crisis, 2 Council seats in Offaly will see Parlon lucky to return and the Mae Sexton is History the Pharma plant promised for Longford has gone to Southern Belgium and her constituency base no longer exists thanks to the boundary commission

So Parlon Country will be no more? no loss…

In it’s present form I think decentralisation should be stopped, but the problem there is that no politician will go near it again for years if it is.

Seems to have been very poorly planned with politics and not common sense playing too big a role. First they developed the spatial plan, which seemed fairly manageable if maybe a bit thinly spread out. Then with decentralisation they totally neglected their new strategy making the whole thing a bit of a farce.

IMHO large population centres should get most of the jobs, such as Cork, Limerick, Waterford, Galway, Sligo….etc.. instead they give them to places like Clonakilty, which is a very nice town but is not going to attract your average civil servant. Another recommendation was to have most of the positions near Dublin so as to avail of the airport, which seems to me to defeat the whole purpose of decentralisation, in effect creating a (bigger) Dublin sprawl. Build up the other airports??? Dublin is already at breaking point!!

Anyway they need to stop treating it as a political football and make some tough decisions because in the end it is going to be as bad for Dublin as it is for the rest of the country……………and we are already seeing plenty of examples!!

Originally posted by Leesider
In it’s present form I think decentralisation should be stopped,

IMHO large population centres should get most of the jobs, such as Cork, Limerick, Waterford, Galway, Sligo….etc.. instead they give them to places like Clonakilty, which is a very nice town but is not going to attract your average civil servant.

There were jobs decentralised out of Cork City recently as well was it to Bandon or Macroom?

How do Cork people feel about it?

Personally, I’d have no problem moving to any of the places you mentioned even Clon but on spatial planning grounds only places the size of Sligo or bigger would work I think.

2,000 semi-state jobs including Failte Ireland would do Cork no harm and would aid your plans for a commercially viable trans-atlantic service.

On a purely personal level, I like cities, and if I was in the civil service, and was told that my department was moving, I would instantly be looking for a new job, or trying to claim constructive dismissal…. you couldnt pay me enough to move to any of the places on the list

Is there a parallel with Dublin after the Act of Union?

The move of the MPs and their retinues to London is said to have sunk Dublin – which at the time was a prominent European city – into a long recession.

I was reading a chapter in an interesting book (A Tale of Two Cities, about Dublin and London in the 19th centuries) which seemed to be saying that although the city went into a recession, the Act of Union wasn’t thought to be the reason (although there were many anti-union protests in the run up to the act which foretold economic woes for the city if passed).

After all the trouble it took to get the city back into shape (up until the 1960’s or 1990’s) it would be a pity if the government kicked it back down again by relocating so many jobs – vibrant urban centres can’t be taken for granted.

I think the opportunity that decentralisation presents is to give the critical mass required necessary through positive agglomeration economies to a few urban centres other than Dublin.

I agree that the last thing we want to do is damage Dublin but I think that comparisons with 1801 are not really valid when one looks at the types of industry Dublin had then and now.

Dublin declined after 1801 quite coincidentelly and judging from the number of developments carried out in the 1810-30’s it was the early Victorian era before Dublin stopped doing well never mind declined.

The reasons Dublin declined were largely because technology moved on from linen and glass industries to more location specific industries such as engineering and coal became the prime determinate of efficiency.

The early 1800′ also saw the opening of the New York Ship canal to the great lakes with the cost of cargo falling 95% in one project, all of a sudden the profits earned from food exports evaporated as North America kick started open market economics

Today Ireland is ahead of the pack with technology most notably IT and meditech, it is possible to decentralise a certain amount of government from Dublin to make room for new investments.

Although I think the approach thus far has been a farce, instead of moving departments, the criterion questions should be what functions can be ‘back-officed’ effectively from all government departments and semi-state bodies?

What would prove attractive sites for the existing workforce to transfer to?

As Paul has said he likes cities, I think that is a fairly general opinion of most city dwellers

Very interesting – is that the Eerie Canal? Amazing that such a distant development had an impact on Dublin.

The economic effect I think is interesting because of its impact on built form. It appears to me that the late 19th century building stock is very thin on the ground compared to other UK cities of the time, especially with an absence of purpose built flats form the late 19th – early 20th century as exists in London. Is this correct?

On the decentralisation I think the ludicrous side comes in when the government is trying to physically decentralise a system which remains resolutely centralised in political terms. Decentralisationn could be beneficial if more power was devolved to local authorities and provinces – then relocating bureaucrats could be justified and surely the regions would benifit more from this.

Medium sized towns can offer a better lifestyle as you look to settle down, but young people will always ( if ambitious at all) prefer Cities.

Dublin, however, is not Manhatten. A suburb in Dublin can look much like one in Sligo, or anywhere else.

I prefer having both, myself. One of the advantages of being a culchie, and Dublin resident, is that we have acheap place in the countryside to visit when the City gets tiresome, you know 🙂

I think De-Centralization should proceed with one area chosen, Cork or Limerick. Just choose an area, and nowhere else. The civil servants who are opposed to it should get compensation.

I think it’s better it be decentralised a bit more than that, but still in concentrated chunks. The current ‘plans’ are ridiculous, fundamentally it is a proposal that hasn’t been thought through, both in terms of the will of the workforces to move, and the framework it should be executed within, i.e. the Spacial Strategy.
The principal is a good one, put planning of a nature other than that for political gain is required.
The plan is nonetheless exciting in terms of the opportunity it brings for some decent modern architecture around the country, and for the progression of the practices of sustainability in development here. Will/would the OPW be acting as architects or are they just involved in the practicalities of the project?

It’s interesting that there’s almost no flats or mansion blocks in Dublin at all from the 19th century, Iveagh Trust aside. Suppose there was never the tradition of flat or apartment living in the city that there was on the Continent, esp in Paris, or to the small degree there was in Britain. Land values or a sufficient concentration of then lower-middle class people in Dublin never prevailed to require such structures. And coming into the Edwardian period, the small Victorian streets off the larger suburban ones had firmly set the trend for the 20th century for terraces of houses in favour of blocks, the type of later blocks that dominate so many UK streets.

I dunno Diaspora about the early 19th century, I’m facinated but unsure about this time – esp that people so often make the point that it’s often said that Dublin came to a halt in residential building after 1801, and that really it did continue to develop, eg Fitzwillian Sq etc. But that’s about it! It’s really only Fitwilliam Sq and St and a scattering other developments that went up!
And considering over the course of the next 30 years the northside emptied of the affluent with virtually no new housing compensating on the southside (except the likes of some of the Synge St area) I think indicates a strong residential depression – something that largely didn’t change till 1830, when a lot started to happen – albeit mostly beyond the canals! Of course this then contributed to a big decline in the city centre, with the abscence of the prosperous concentrated residential development that so benefited the small Georgian city.
Suppose there’s two aspects to it, the commercial health of the city, and the residential aspect, both of which offer kind of conflicting signals. In the housing stakes at least, the suburbs could have done with a bit of decentralisaton to the city!

Originally published by RTE Interactive
O’Dea restates commitment to decentralisation

http://www.rte.ie/news/2004/0727/decentralisation.html

27 July 2004 10:04
The Junior Minister in the Department of Justice, Willie O’Dea, has restated the Government’s commitment to decentralisation of the civil service. However, he stressed that it could only proceed with consensus.

Speaking on RTÉ Radio, Mr O’Dea said the three-year time scale for implementation, outlined on Budget day, was a general guideline.

He added that people could not be forcibly decentralised just to meet some sort of artificial time scale.

He said there would be a better idea of when it would happen when the implementation report was published in a few weeks’ time.

So the steamroller approach has finally been dropped and climb down Willy has been put on the case.

Graham as for the early 19th Century you could be right about it being a lesser period of growth than the late 18th century.

A lot of the areas directly outside the canals did grow and the distilling and brewing industires did well no doubt helped by cheap grain imports from North America.

It is probably at this point that America became the focus of attention as against the UK.

Originally posted by Diaspora

There were jobs decentralised out of Cork City recently as well was it to Bandon or Macroom?

How do Cork people feel about it?

Personally, I’d have no problem moving to any of the places you mentioned even Clon but on spatial planning grounds only places the size of Sligo or bigger would work I think.

2,000 semi-state jobs including Failte Ireland would do Cork no harm and would aid your plans for a commercially viable trans-atlantic service.

2,000 jobs for Cork, but how many of these will actually come about?? It’s grand giving the jobs to places like Clon if you are starting from scratch, but when you are asking people to move from Dublin the least you can do is give them a viable option!

The governement seems to be killing it’s own spatial plan with it’s decentralisation plans!

As for Dublin dieing a death I don’t think ye need worry about that, what will kill Dublin is over centralisation, which has been going on for decades now. But the major problems with this have only become apparent in the last 10 years.

I did say that I wouldn’t have a problem with moving to Clon it is a great town but that is purely a personal impression

I wouldn’t try and force anyone to move to a place of that size. In fact as the redundance act has shown it isn’t possible to force anyone beyond a certain reasonable distance at all.

You are absolutely correct about the Government entirely jettisoning its own spatial strategy, which cost millions of €€€€’s of taxpayers money.

Dublin is in crisis not because of any over centralisation strategy it is because there never has been any strategy fully implemented.

1970 saw the Buchanan report
1985 saw the Eastern Regional Develpment Strategy (Chaired by Liam Lawlor) ERDO
1998 The Strategic Planning guidelines for the Greater Dublin Area

All of which have done little other than gather dust on a shelf while low density housing estate after estate have scaled the lower reaches of the Dublin foothills and towns such Swords, Ashbourne and Celbridge have grown into dormitories.

I wouldn’t have any problem with Cork and Galway being developed into viable urban centres with proper international air connections.

Dublin however needs its metro, second airport terminal and a lot of other public transport measures such as QBC’s etc.

Decentralisation in its current format must be abandoned along with its authors being sent to foreign provinces and back benches

i think that in the back of their minds, the ministers think that by building 20 3-5million office blocks around the country, they can get out of what they see as being an unpopular expenditure in their parish by okaying a metro for Dublin…..

And no coincidence that the Luas is one of the Irish Rural Dwellers Association’s greatest weapons in stirring up the anti-Dublin frenzy.

Originally posted by Diaspora

as for the early 19th Century you could be right about it being a lesser period of growth than the late 18th century.

Surely not! You’re not usually one for the appeasing all-rounder Diaspora! 😀

THIS POST BY DIASPORA (TRY NOT TO POST IN MY NAME AGAIN, DIASPORA!).

DEVIN.

Originally published by Ireland.com
O Cuiv insists decentralisation on schedule
From:ireland.com
Tuesday, 27th July, 2004

The Minister for Community, Rural Affairs and the Gaeltacht, Mr Ó Cuív said today the decentralisation of his department to Co Mayo will be completed within the next three years.

The Minister made his comments today after two senior ministers yesterday said that decentralisation would not be completed in the three-year deadline set out by the outgoing Minister for Finance, Mr McCreevy, in his budget last December.

Mr Ó Cuív said it would be important that there would be no row back or fundamental change in the objective of the Government to introduce radical decentralisation around the country.

However, he said he felt that most, but not all, of the Government departments which have been targeted would be decentralised within the time frame.

Meanwhile, the IMPACT trade union has welcomed today’s statement by Minister of State, Mr Willie O’Dea, which advocated building a consensus on the future of public service decentralisation . But the union, which represents 1,600 staff earmarked for decentralisation , said it would not be enough to simply implement existing decentralisation proposals over a longer time period.

IMPACT National Secretary Peter Nolan said a new timetable was necessary, but not sufficient, to develop workable decentralisation .

Mr Nolan said: “We welcome Minister O’Dea’s call for consensus building. But this requires a reassessment of the entire programme, not just the time scale. Earlier this month the Finance Department published data that showed most specialist public servants were unwilling to relocate with their existing organisations. The inevitable result is that decentralisation is simply not practical for organisations that depend heavily on specialist staff.

You cannot run the probation service without qualified probation officers, the Health and Safety Authority without qualified safety inspectors, or Comhairle without specialist advisors. We need a new approach that focuses on practical decentralisation , which protects service delivery and which does not cost the taxpayer a fortune,” he said.

Does a potential Minister for State need to publicly declare support for Decentralisation for consideration or is our Eammon making sure he keeps his job by putting the location in such a place that there would be no other contenders for the position?

Appeasement is a skill both myself and this current government might want to learn 😀

BY DIASPORA

Sorry about that Devin I should have checked the user when I logged in on the guest computer, those are indeed my comments

BTW I saw Bertie on the news tonight and I interpreted the sage of Drumcoundra as having said that he now sees a five year timetable in the crystal ball.

In other words the three years from December 2003 that would have been completed six months before the next it election i.e. June 2007 is now dead. It has now gone the route of all promises that will not be honoured a timeframe beyond the life of the current Dail

Originally posted by Diaspora
Sorry about that Devin I should have checked the user when I logged in on the guest computer

actually that was deirdres computer

but never mind i forgive u this time

Originally posted by Graham Hickey
And no coincidence that the Luas is one of the Irish Rural Dwellers Association’s greatest weapons in stirring up the anti-Dublin frenzy.

you can call this having a chip on my shoulder or being bitter, whatever you want, but the facts speak for themselves!!

Dublin has a population of 1.2 million, gets 800million for Luas and more than likely another billion for the Metro, Cork City and environs population 350,000, gets a lousy 100million for suburban routes!!!! do the maths, it smacks of Dublinisation!!!!

Don’t get me wrong this is not an anti dub thing, more of an anti government thing!!

Originally posted by Leesider

Dublin has a population of 1.2 million, gets 800million for Luas and more than likely another billion for the Metro, Cork City and environs population 350,000, gets a lousy 100million for suburban routes!!!! do the maths, it smacks of Dublinisation!!!!

It is not that Dublin didn’t need LUAS, the Country didn’t need the cost to spiral out of control to 800m. The Interconnector project or underground metro section will link all existing lines which now have three different terminuses. Dublin is one of the few 15-20m passenger airports in Europe without any rail connection, although a cheaper overground link now seems like the favoured option.

Can you imagine getting from a train from Dublin to Cork and having to travel two kilometres on a bus to take a train to Cobh?

The Rationale behind a lot of the rail investment plans are dealt with at http://www.platform11.org

Their last success was to have the Little Island to Midleton rail line reopened, their latest major campaign is to get a direct service from Clonmel to Dublin.

Most supporters of the Dublin Metro would totaly support these projects.

Unlike IRDA who simply want to go on subsidising one off houses; a strategy which ensures that there is no money to do anything with the rail network.

Decentralisation is a strategy pandering to the Bungalow lobby a sort of ‘if mohamad won’t go to the mountain then the mountain must come to mohamad’

What is the rationale behind decentralising jobs from Dublin to Trim?

article in today’s indo on decentralisation:

http://www.unison.ie/irish_independent/stories.php3?ca=9&si=1223377&issue_id=11204

totally agree with the part

This plan only represents the continued expansion of Dublin into the Midlands, or a shift of boundaries,”

Of course everone seems to be so concerned about the effect decentralisation will have on Dublin, but no quote on the positive impact it will have on other cities and towns.
The Dublin attitude is we want it all and you do have it all, and you can’t seem to stand seeing somewhere else in Ireland get anything.
As for not wanting to move, we are all Irish, this country belongs to everyone including Dubliners and you are just the same as a person from Galway, Clonmel etc etc.
Stop talking down about everybody and every place outside of Dublin, it is bloody narrowminded.
As for the advise given to the Government to make a new capital, of course this was dismissed as been stupid by Dubliners, the lime light might be taken away from them and somewhere else might get some attention.
Has Canberra effected Sydneys or Melbournes prosperity, no, Brazillia-Rio, Sao Paulo, no, Washington-New York ,no, Wellington-Auckland, no, Pretoria-Johannesburg, Cape Town, no.
Enough Said.
Down with stuck up, greedy, narrowminded and biased Dublin people.

FEDERAL REPUBLIC FOR IRELAND NOW

Originally posted by Sean Carney
Down with stuck up, greedy, narrowminded and biased Dublin people.

Yes Sean, making broad sweeping comments about places or people in our country is very narrow-minded isnt it?;)

(in reply to Sean) No need to get personal about it – a huge proportion of Dublin’s population originate from outside Dublin (and have also had a big impact on the policies which shaped Dublin over the past few decades).

In reply to your points:
1. The national spatial strategy is supposed to take care of distributing growth sustainably throughout the country and the current (either idiotic or blatantly clientilist) decentralisation plan flies in the face of this. Nobody is objecting to the national spatial strategy.

2. The decentralisaton plan is not in fact decentralisation at all but merely relocation of elements of a centralised system (see article in Irish Times yesterday re submission on decentralisation by head of University of Limerick to Dept of Finance committee).

3. The decentralisation plan goes against current best practice in terms of both urban development and ‘joined-up thinking’ in public administration.

I agree. There was an excellent article in the Times last week which outlined exactly how disjointed our government is. The example used was the Governments Drug Strategy, the administration of which covers about 6 different departments.

I have no problem with federalism… that would be a more effective form of decentralisation but surely the most logocal and cost effective form would be to strengthen local government. This present plan is so blatantly an attempt to provide perks for certain constituencies… witness Willie O’Dea setting out his cabinet stall with a promise to be Minister for Limerick